More Draconian Than PTA: Human Rights Commission Demands Withdrawal of Organised Crime Bill
The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) has called for the immediate withdrawal and substantial revision of the proposed Prevention of Organised Crime Bill, warning that the draft law is “wholly incompatible” with the country’s Constitution and international human rights treaties. In a formal letter to Minister of Justice and National Integration Harshana Nanayakkara dated October 21, 2026, the rights watchdog cautioned that the proposed legislation is potentially more draconian than the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) of 1979.
While acknowledging that organized crime poses serious threats to human rights—particularly to women, children, victims, and witnesses—the Commission emphasized that any counter-measures must strictly align with fundamental constitutional protections. However, following an initial review under its statutory mandate to advise the government on human rights promotion, the HRCSL concluded that the current draft severely undermines basic freedoms and judicial authority.
A primary area of concern highlighted by HRCSL Chairman Justice L.T.B. Dehideniya is Section 47 of the Bill, which allows confessions made to police officers at or above the rank of Assistant Superintendent of Police to be admissible as evidence. Replicating Section 16 of the PTA, this mechanism creates a dangerous incentive for torture, as well as cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of suspects held in prolonged police custody.
Under Clause 21, senior police officials could apply to the Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security for detention orders to hold suspects for questioning for an initial period of two months, renewable up to twelve months via High Court orders. The Commission warned that combining prolonged administrative detention with admissible police confessions serves as a direct recipe for custodial abuse.
The Commission further raised alarms over the excessively broad definition of “serious crime” under Clause 3. Beyond major offenses, the law sweeps in minor violations carrying four or more years of imprisonment, as well as infractions listed in its First Schedule. These include regulatory and non-violent offenses such as violations of the Customs Ordinance, importing animals without permits under the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance, copyright or patent infringements under the Intellectual Property Act, forest conservation violations, and obstructing public servants. Strikingly, individuals could face administrative detention orders simply for allegedly obstructing a police investigation into any offense.
In addition, Clause 4(2) casts an unreasonably wide net over citizens when defining membership in an organized criminal group. Under the draft provisions, individuals could be classified as members based on physical or virtual meetings, style of dress, hand signs, language, tattoos, or mere association with known gang members.
The HRCSL also emphasized that the Bill strips the judiciary of its constitutional discretionary powers. Article 13(2) of the Sri Lankan Constitution mandates that no person shall be held in custody or detained except upon a judge’s order. In contrast, Clause 20 compels Magistrates to remand suspects or execute administrative detention orders issued by the Ministry Secretary, leaving judges with no power to evaluate the basis of the order or grant bail. Reiterating recommendations previously made regarding counter-terrorism legislation, the HRCSL stressed that judicial officers must maintain meaningful authority at all times to release or bail suspects.
Copies of the letter were also forwarded to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake in his capacity as Minister of Defence. Media Spokesperson Nihal Chandrasiri confirmed that the Commission’s official position remains that the Bill must be withdrawn until it fully guarantees compliance with fundamental rights and international obligations.